Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Files

The candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and promotion is the primary means for conveying the activity and productivity of the candidate to the Ad Hoc Tenure Committee and to subsequent review bodies. The primary purpose underlying a well-structured tenure and promotion file is to provide a continuum of development throughout all reappointment review periods. Thus, the candidate for tenure and promotion is encouraged to build and maintain a file structured so as to allow a simple updating with each new annual review procedure. Generally speaking, files for promotion to full professor should follow the same basic guidelines below as files for tenure and promotion.

  1. Narrative Statement of Accomplishments

    The candidate shall provide a narrative overview of her/his career, highlighting his/her accomplishments during the period under review. This is the first item in the file. Early in that narrative there should be a numerical listing of major accomplishments in order to provide a summary overview, i.e., a listing of numbers of the following: books, journal articles, edited books, book chapters, paper presentations at professional conferences, citations, external and internal grant applications, book reviews, and courses taught. The statement should provide detail on the scope of the research agenda, and address issues of trajectory.

  2. Curriculum Vita

    The curriculum vitae is the second item in the file. The CV should provide full citation information on each publication. It should also clearly differentiate between peer-reviewed publications and non-peer-reviewed publications, and between published and forthcoming and under review and in progress items.

  3. Research Scholarship Documentation Includes:

    Pdfs of publications, conference papers, grant proposals (transmittal form with budget and abstract, evidence of submission, and reviewers’ comments if available), published reviews of candidate’s books or articles, and any additional documentation deemed relevant. For peer-reviewed items, faculty should document the following where applicable: quality of the publication; acceptance or rejection rates; reputation and prestige of the publication outlet; targeted audience; impact of the item (especially course adoptions and citation levels).

  4. Teaching Documentation Includes:

    Student evaluations and student comments; course syllabi; examinations; exercises; assignments and handouts; peer reviews of teaching; evidence concerning supervision of theses and dissertations; evidence of service on student committees; evidence of extraordinary advising; and any additional documentation deemed relevant.

  5. Citizenship and Service Documentation Includes:

    Evidence of committee, council, task force and working group memberships, and contribution levels to those entities; evidence of professional service through academic and professional associations and contribution levels; evidence of peer reviewing; evidence of applied practice within and beyond the university; and any additional documentation deemed relevant.

  6. Supplementary Activities Documentation:

    The candidate may add any documentation or evidence of additional activities which she or he may want the relevant reviewing bodies to view and which assist in establishing the contours and details of professional accomplishments in the period under review.

  7. Letters of Reference

    Outside letters of reference are required for tenure and promotion reviews. To assist this process, the candidate may submit the names of experts in her/his field who he or she considers capable of judging the candidate's work in an objective manner. The Director will also generate other possible outside reviewers to be contacted. The specific means for acquiring these letters are detailed in the University Policy Register. The Director is responsible for meeting this requirement and for placing these letters in the candidate’s file.

  8. File Submission

    The file should be submitted electronically, using the format, platform and interface in use at the university at the time the file is submitted. The candidate’s file should be reviewed with the Director for completeness and accuracy prior to acceptance for review.